Obama’s “Retro” Attacks on Romney

In Virginia a few days ago, Obama said, “Just yesterday my opponent called my position on fuel efficiency standards extreme. I don’t know, it doesn’t seem extreme to me to want to have more fuel efficient cars. Maybe the steam engine is more his speed.”

Actually steam engines and windmills are both part of Obama’s green energy boondoggles.

In Iowa, Obama said, “What they offered over those three days was more often than not an agenda that was better-suited for the last century,” Obama said. “We might as well have watched it on a black-and-white TV.”

Sure the last century was only 12 years ago, but why would you expect “Mr. 57 States” to know that?

Under Bush in 2000, the national debt is half of what it was today. When adjusted for inflation, median household income in 2000 was actually higher than it is today.

And if we go back to the black-and-white TV era. In 1952 the unemployment rate was below 2 percent. The average cost of a house was $73,000 in today’s dollars and a gallon of gas cost $1.62 in today’s money. Also the artificial heart, the hovercraft, optical fiber and the polio vaccine were invented that year. What did we invent this year?

Maybe Obama should take a closer look at those black-and-white TV ideas. They seemed to work pretty well.

This fits the theme of Obama’s “Forward” campaign. The progressive impetus to move forward, without perhaps considering that they may be leaving some good ideas that worked behind in the rearview mirror.

  • Reason_For_Life

    "Under Bush in 2000, the national debt is half of what it was today. When adjusted for inflation, median household income in 2000 was actually higher than it is today."

    Newsflash – Bush wasn't president in 2000. Clinton was. Under Bush the national debt nearly doubled (depending on how you count the TARP).

    "And if we go back to the black-and-white TV era. In 1952 the unemployment rate was below 2 percent. The average cost of a house was $73,000 in today’s dollars and a gallon of gas cost $1.62 in today’s money. "

    Newsflash – As a proportion of income housing and gas were much higher than today. The unemployment rate was 2% in 1952 but was 7% in 1951 and 4% in 1953. Women comprised a much smaller portion of the workforce.

    "What did we invent this year?"

    A ton of political fiction by both parties about their own candidates.

    • PaulRevereNow

      So Bush was Prez in 2001. Yes, Bush spent money like water, but still at only half the rate of Stinky. In the 1940's, the US still dominated the world steel market; and in the 40's and 50's, unemployment was NEVER above 8% for 43 straight months. Not even close. Then you say, "As a proportion of income, housing and gas were much higher than today." I'm not sure about that, because in 1955, you could buy a nice house for less than $10,000; and if your income was between 5,000 and 10,000 a year, you were doing well for yourself. Also remember that in the 1950's, there wasn't the bewildering variety of things to spend your money on(that we have today). I also remember that in 1963, gasoline was 25 cents a gallon.(that was the expensive kind) And yes, women were a smaller percentage of the work force; but THAT wasn't the fault of the Republicans.

      • Reason_For_Life

        That "nice" 1950's house had less than half the floor space of a modern home. It had no air conditioning, was wired for 20 amps and was built on a less than a quarter acre of land 10 feet away from your neighbors. My first home was one of those 1950's made disasters where the concrete slab in the garage cracked because the builder had bribed the housing inspectors who let him remove the rebar.

        In 1970 gas was about 30 cents, but so was a Big Mac. They're both about $3.50 today. Manufactured goods per capita was far smaller then than today. US manufacturing hasn't declined, we manufacture more goods today than ever and more than China ever has (or ever will). It's that we are far, far more efficient and require far fewer people.

        Obama is a catastrophe, worse than Bush, worse than any president except Wilson and Roosevelt. When he's reelected he will move at least into second place behind only Wilson. I said "when" not "if" because Romney is the worst candidate the Republicans have put up since Alf Landon who ran a campaign much like Romney's. Landon ran on a Roosevelt-lite platform just as Romney is running on an Obama-lite message. Romney's idea of conservatism is to conserve the New Deal and the Great Society. Once you concede that these were good ideas you guarantee the election of the man who want to expand them, not simply maintain them.

  • jamesbbkk

    There seem to be a lot of misses on these old-timer attacks by Pres. Obama and minions. See, e.g., the slander of Rutherford B. Hayes. http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/03/contra

    Steam engines for combined heat and power are actually quite efficient – about 75% http://www.turbinesinfo.com/steam-turbine-efficie…. Moreso than than the internal combustion engine on gasoline of about 20% (diesel is a little better), which due to portability and low bulk of both the engine and liquid fuel is of course suited for a different purpose. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/atv.shtml.

    The point is, Obama's imagry is way off base given that steam engines remain some of our best technology for efficient conversion of heat content to do work on a fully on-demand basis over time at some of the lowest costs per kWh of any plant. The use matters.

  • http://www.granville-eyeland.com/optical Retro eyewear frames

    This is quite interesting. I’m glad that I came across something like this.
    Retro eyewear frames